Helen Thomas unlikely to hold her plum press seat

The White House Correspondents' Association is debating what to do about Helen Thomas in the wake of the explosion of outrage over her claim that Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and go back to Europe.

The WHCA has not commented publicly on her remarks, but in an e-mail circulated late last night, CNN's Ed Henry, who's also the secretary of the WHCA, described them as "shocking and indefensible."

That makes it unlikely that Thomas will be allowed to continue to hold her plum seat in the White House press room, which, unsurprisingly, was empty today:

In the e-mail, Henry sharply criticized Thomas' remarks as "offensive," noting that there's "a lot of frustration" among members of the WHCA, and "rightly so." But he also noted that many journalists he's spoken with "do not want this one awful episode to define her entire career." And Henry reminded colleagues that the White House would have a say as to whether she keeps her seat. "That power comes at the discretion of the White House itself," he wrote.

But Robert Gibbs just weighed in at the press briefing, describing her comments as "reprehensible." And a conservative colleague just gave me another very good reason why it's unlikely that she'll be allowed to keep it: If she stays, right-wingers will use it to savage the press as anti-Israel.

"They can't let her sit up front because people like me will just use it to bludgeon them," the colleague told me.

Like I said above, the WHCA is currently debating what to do, but it's hard to believe she won't be a goner within hours.

Long live first amendment. Poor woman completely and wantonly misinterpreted to cover up the atrocious murders on high seas by Israel. Kudos to UK's Cameron for his bold denunciation. US is the 51st state of Israel now.

Hey Greg, there's something I noticed about this episode that I was wondering if you had noticed too. I guess I have to restate my belief that what she said was stupid and that I don't condone them since I'm sure this post will attract a lot of trolls. Having said that as I looked over the intertubes last night and this morning just about every site that bashed her for these comments made sure to point out that she her parents were Lebanese immigrants. Even Joke Line over at Swampland made this distinction. And its pretty obvious what the insinuation is. I was wondering if you noticed the same thing. And bigger than that, if her family history or upbringing made her feel a certain way towards Israel would this be the first time in her long and storied career that she made these kinds of statements? I mean seriously, all of a sudden now at her age this is an issue?

No one is trying to take away Thomas's First Amendment rights. She can say whatever the "hell" she wants, and I don't have a problem with that.

Her problem is, however, that she is an "objective" journalist employed by a privately-owned company with perhaps the most coveted reporting assignment as a member of the White House press association. With that platform comes a certain responsibility, and she has now destroyed her reputation because of this careless comment.

First Amendment aside, people in certain positions simply cannot say whatever they want and expect to maintain their employment or professional position.

you've shown repeatedly that you're wreckless and a liar. Thee is apparently no guard to your foul mouth.

But let me counsel you to watch it where libel is concerned.

Posted by: whistling | June 7, 2010 12:58 PM

...............

You are the hatemonger who posted that Germany during the 1930s, had the right idea in how to handle The Jews, so bring it on sewer rat. Your comment is in the Post archives, so I will wipe the floor with you in any court in the land, and take you to the cleaners.

amkeew; I think you mean to say that Israel is the 51st state. I would add that the U.S. has too long been Occupied Territories of Israel.

I say a resounding "Brava!" to Helen Thomas for bluntly stating her anti-zionist sentiment. Pretending that no one lived in Palestine before the British "gave" it to the European Jews is as reprehensible as what the zionists feel over Helen's recent remark.

Prior to the arrival of European zionists, Jews and Arabs; Hebrews, Muslims and Christians, lived in peace side-by-side in the land known as Palestine. The bulk of the modern-day trouble in the Holy Land began in May 1948. Arabs were disarmed by the withdrawing British while World Jewish movements were arming and financing the incoming European zionists. If the zionists came in peace, why did they need to have guns? Perhaps they knew that someone wasn't going to be happy having their house, olive grove and land taken away from them.

Obviously, Thomas' comment applies to those right-wing Israelis who refuse to seek a nice, peaceful way to further usurp Palestinian land. If U.S. zionists are so hell-bent on protecting and perpetrating the narrow-minded notion that God's Chosen People are only Jewish, then they should take a slice of Texas and give it to the Israelis to come here and live "in peace."

This fear of offending Jewish sensitivity and the risk of being labeled anti-semitic for being critical of zionism is irrational. As a former zionist whose eyes have been opened to the plight of the Palestinians since Ottoman rule, British occupation and Zionist domination, I say:

Forget the tit-for-tat discussion. Helen Thomas deserves a promotion to the Middle East Section at the State Department.
Are you listening Hilary and Barack?

Lets see if the world would sit back at watch China take over Australia, or North Korea take over South Korea... It would never happen. But the world allowed Euopean Jews take Palestine from BOTH Chritian and Muslim people. I know Hundreds of Christian Palestinian people who had their homes taken away. It is sad how people think it is only the Muslims that were affected.
We (christian Australia, America and Europe) let Jews kill and rob Christians of homes in OUR HOLY land... We Christians Just sided with those who killed Jesus.